Posted
by
Zonk
on Thursday July 19, 2007 @03:41PM
from the does-that-mean-we-don't-need-to-play-anymore dept.

tgeller writes "My story on the Nature site announced that a team of computer scientists at the University of Alberta has solved checkers. From the game's 500 billion billion positions (5 * 10^20), 'Chinook' has determined which 100,000 billion (10^14) are needed for their proof, and run through all relevant decision trees. They've set up a site where you can see the proof, traverse the logic, and play their unbeatable automaton. '[Jonathan] Schaeffer notes that his research has implications beyond the checkers board. The same algorithms his team writes to solve games could be helpful in searching other databases, such as vast lists of biological information because, as he says, "At the core, they both reduce to the same fundamental problem: large, compressed data sets that have to be accessed quickly."'"

They've set up a site where you can see the proof, traverse the logic, and play their unbeatable automaton.

Holy crap. ..you have any idea how badly their server is going to be slashdotted now? It's bad enough when its a php driven webpage but now you've just encouraged slashdotters to try a game or two against it. ..if the server crashes in the middle of a game is it considered a win for the human player?

Now, far be it from me to criticize the research of a group that can manage to convince someone to give them a grant to play checkers with a computer all day, but their "proof" on that site is a little suspect.

When I click on the proof, all I get is a Java error saying "Unable to connect to server". While the inability to connect to the Checkers server may make it "Unbeatable" in a Wargames-esque "the only way to win is not to play" kind of way, it's kind of a cop-out.